The Hebrew that is typically translated as “anointed (one)” in English is translated in Bashkir as masikh (мәсих), the same term that is used in the New Testament for Μεσσίας (engl. “Messiah”) and Χριστός (engl. “Christ”).
Translation team member Gulsira Gizatullina explains (in a translation from Bashkir by Teija Greed):
“When we were choosing in the team the term for ‘to anoint,’ from the very start we did not go for the simple verb ‘to rub (with) oil; to oil’ (which is used in contexts like ‘oiling one’s hair when combing it’ or ‘oiling a frying pan’), because we felt that this verb cannot fully express the true meaning [of the biblical concept]. The terms masekhlay [anoint], masekh mayy [anointing oil], Masikh [Messiah] also exist in Islam, and they are familiar terms to [Bashkir] Muslims who know religious terminology. That is why we chose masekhlay [for the concept ‘to anoint’].”
Teija Greed explains further: “The Turkic language Bashkir spoken in Russia uses the Bashkir word masikh (мәсих) for the Hebrew mashiach in Ps 2:2 [and in other places in the Old Testament], with a lower-case ‘m.’ The Bashkir team decided that this is how the Hebrew meaning ‘anointed one’ is translated everywhere. The link with the New Testament’s Masikh — capitalized -, is therefore very easy to understand. Masikh (Мәсих) is known from the Qur’an as being Jesus’ title. The idea about using masikh for the general ‘anointed one’ was first introduced by one of the translators, and I’d think the link with the original Hebrew term is not generally known. However, we in the team find this a practical way to make the Bashkir audience aware of both the meaning of the word, and the connection between the two Testaments.”
In Chichewa, it is translated with wodzozedwa. In Chewa culture, this word is used to refer to people of authority such as chiefs who are anointed through the ritual of pouring oil on their head when they are being installed. The pouring of oil symbolizes receiving of spiritual powers that they may act wisely and justly under the guidance of God. This ritual also signifies that leadership comes from God and that it can be done accordingly if leaders depend on God. (Source: Mawu a Mulungu mu Chichewa Chalero Back Translation)
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way to do this is through the usage (or a lack) of an honorific prefix as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. When the referent is God, the “divine” honorific prefix mi- (御 or み) can be used, as in mi-sumai (御民) or “people (of God)” in the referenced verses. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
The Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Latin that is translated as a form of “save” in English is translated in Shipibo-Conibo with a phrase that means literally “make to live,” which combines the meaning of “to rescue” and “to deliver from danger,” but also the concept of “to heal” or “restore to health.”
In San Blas Kuna it is rendered as “help the heart,” in Laka, it is “take by the hand” in the meaning of “rescue” or “deliver,” in Huautla Mazatec the back-translation of the employed term is “lift out on behalf of,” in Anuak, it is “have life because of,” in Central Mazahua “be healed in the heart,” in Baoulé “save one’s head” (meaning to rescue a person in the fullest sense), in Guerrero Amuzgo “come out well,” in Northwestern Dinka “be helped as to his breath” (or “life”) (source: Bratcher / Nida), in Matumbi as “rescue (from danger)” (source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific notes in Paratext), and in Noongarbarrang-ngandabat or “hold life” (source: Warda-Kwabba Luke-Ang).
Translators of different languages have found different ways with what kind of formality God is addressed. The first example is from a language where God is always addressed distinctly formal whereas the second is one where the opposite choice was made.
Click or tap here to see the rest of this insight
Like many languages (but unlike Greek or Hebrew or English), Tuvan uses a formal vs. informal 2nd person pronoun (a familiar vs. a respectful “you”). Unlike other languages that have this feature, however, the translators of the Tuvan Bible have attempted to be very consistent in using the different forms of address in every case a 2nd person pronoun has to be used in the translation of the biblical text.
As Voinov shows in Pronominal Theology in Translating the Gospels (in: The Bible Translator2002, p. 210ff. ), the choice to use either of the pronouns many times involved theological judgment. While the formal pronoun can signal personal distance or a social/power distance between the speaker and addressee, the informal pronoun can indicate familiarity or social/power equality between speaker and addressee.
In these verses, in which humans address God, the informal, familiar pronoun is used that communicates closeness.
Voinov notes that “in the Tuvan Bible, God is only addressed with the informal pronoun. No exceptions. An interesting thing about this is that I’ve heard new Tuvan believers praying with the formal form to God until they are corrected by other Christians who tell them that God is close to us so we should address him with the informal pronoun. As a result, the informal pronoun is the only one that is used in praying to God among the Tuvan church.”
In Gbaya, “a superior, whether father, uncle, or older brother, mother, aunt, or older sister, president, governor, or chief, is never addressed in the singular unless the speaker intends a deliberate insult. When addressing the superior face to face, the second person plural pronoun ɛ́nɛ́ or ‘you (pl.)’ is used, similar to the French usage of vous.
Accordingly, the translators of the current version of the Gbaya Bible chose to use the plural ɛ́nɛ́ to address God. There are a few exceptions. In Psalms 86:8, 97:9, and 138:1, God is addressed alongside other “gods,” and here the third person pronoun o is used to avoid confusion about who is being addressed. In several New Testament passages (Matthew 21:23, 26:68, 27:40, Mark 11:28, Luke 20:2, 23:37, as well as in Jesus’ interaction with Pilate and Jesus’ interaction with the Samaritan woman at the well) the less courteous form for Jesus is used to indicate ignorance of his position or mocking (source Philip Noss).
In Dutch and Western Frisian translations, however, God is always addressed with the formal pronoun.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between.
One way Japanese show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, ko-rare-ru (来られる) or “come” is used.
Like a number of other East Asian languages, Japanese uses a complex system of honorifics, i.e. a system where a number of different levels of politeness are expressed in language via words, word forms or grammatical constructs. These can range from addressing someone or referring to someone with contempt (very informal) to expressing the highest level of reference (as used in addressing or referring to God) or any number of levels in-between. One way Japanese show different degree of politeness is through the usage of an honorific construction where the morphemes rare (られ) or are (され) are affixed on the verb as shown here in the widely-used Japanese Shinkaiyaku (新改訳) Bible of 2017. This is particularly done with verbs that have God as the agent to show a deep sense of reverence. Here, s-are-ru (される) or “do/make” is used. (Source: S. E. Doi, see also S. E. Doi in Journal of Translation, 18/2022, p. 37ff. )
Here at last is the answer to the questions of verse 8. For a discussion of various ways to help the reader understand that this is indeed the answer, see comments on verse 8.
The first part of the verse says the same thing twice in different words. The first line, Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, is clear enough. The Hebrew word here translated salvation is a form of the same root as that translated “victory” in verse 8. Good News Translation expresses the meaning in modern English as “You went out to save your people.”
The second line is not quite so clear. Revised Standard Version translates literally for the salvation of thy anointed. Anointing someone was a sign that the person was specially chosen by God. Thus Good News Translation often translates as “chosen.” The question is, to whom does thy anointed refer? It is a term often used of the king, either the particular individual, or the kings in general as the descendants of David (as in Psa 89.38, 51). Good News Translation accepts this interpretation and translates as “to save your chosen king” (compare Bible en français courant, Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch). However, in this context, where thy anointed is parallel with thy people, it seems more likely that it refers to the nation of Israel as a whole. If this interpretation is accepted, a translation base can be “to save your chosen nation,” or even “to save your chosen nation Israel.” This interpretation has some support from the Septuagint, which understood anointed collectively and translated as a plural. Compare the usage in Psalm 28.8, where the words “his people” and “his anointed” are again parallel with each other. In languages which do not use the passive, one may say “You went out to save the nation which you have chosen.” Salvation (“save”) in some languages will need to be rendered as a phrase; for example, “help … to escape from their enemies.”
The rest of the verse gives more detail about the way God saves his people, namely, by destroying their enemies. It contains problems both in the text itself and in its interpretation. Either it speaks directly about a person who is leader of the forces opposed to God, or else it speaks of this person through the figure of a building. The ultimate reference is the same either way, but the translator must make two decisions:
(1) Is the Hebrew using figurative language?
(2) If so, is it better to keep it or to drop it in translation?
A literal translation is found in Revised Version: “Thou woundedst the head out of the house of the wicked, laying bare the foundation even unto the neck.” As in 2.9, the basic question is whether the word “house” stands for a building or a family. The presence of the word “foundation” in the last line suggests that “house” is intended as a building; compare Moffatt, Bible de Jérusalem, Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible. (Bible de Jérusalem and Jerusalem Bible drop the word for “head,” though this is hardly necessary.) To wound the head of a house must then be a figurative way to describe damaging or removing the roof (compare Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch “You tear off the roof of your enemy’s palace”). The last line then goes on to describe the complete destruction of the house. The idea of laying bare the foundations as a sign of complete destruction occurs also in Micah 1.6. If this is the correct interpretation, the main problem lies in the words “even unto the neck” (Revised Version). One would expect some term that refers to the other end from the head, such as foot. Some scholars have suggested dropping one letter from the Hebrew word for neck. This gives a word meaning “rock.” To speak of “laying bare the foundations even unto the rock” would make good sense in itself and would also fit the context very well. The change of “neck” to “rock” is accepted by Bible de Jérusalem, Jerusalem Bible, and New English Bible.
Revised Standard Versionlaying him bare from thigh to neck has taken a different interpretation, and has understood the passage to speak directly of the enemy leader as a person. This view has led Revised Standard Version to drop the word “house” altogether (compare New American Bible) and apparently to change the word for “foundation” to another word meaning thigh. This necessitates changing three letters out of four in the Hebrew word for “foundation” and cannot be judged very convincing.
Good News Translation has adopted the first interpretation discussed above, including the change from “neck” to “rock,” but has dropped the figurative language. Good News Translation has made it explicit that the building is a symbol for a group of people, the roof standing for the leader and the rest of the building for the followers. Thus Good News Translation translates “You struck down the leader of the wicked and completely destroyed his followers” (compare Bible en français courant). In the context of Habakkuk, this is best taken to refer to the Babylonians.
To sum up, we recommend that translators (1) interpret the passage as speaking of a building which is a symbol for people, and (2) accept the change from “neck” to “rock.” In most cases, it will also be helpful to follow the example of Good News Translation, that is, to drop the symbolism and to state clearly that the passage refers to wicked people. But if translators prefer to keep the figurative language, an alternative translation model is the following: “You removed the roof of the house of the wicked, exposing the foundation right down to the rock.”
The verse ends with Selah; see comments on verse 3.
Quoted with permission from Clark, David J. & Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on the Book of Habakkuk. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1989. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.